6He said to me, “Mortal, do you see what they are doing, the great abominations that the house of Israel are committing here, to drive me far from my sanctuary? Yet you will see still greater abominations.”
The Hebrew that is translated as “abomination” or similar in English is translated in Vidunda as “hated thing.” (Source: Pioneer Bible Translators, project-specific translation notes in Paratext)
in Ngambay it is nékɔb or “taboo.” (Source: Andy Warren-Rothlin)
God transcends gender, but most languages are limited to grammatical gender expressed in pronouns. In the case of English, this is traditionally confined to “he” (or in the forms “his,” “him,” and “himself”), “she” (and “her,” “hers,” and “herself”), and “it” (and “its” and “itself”).
Modern Mandarin Chinese, however, offers another possibility. Here, the third-person singular pronoun is always pronounced the same (tā), but it is written differently according to its gender (他 is “he,” 她 is “she,” and 它/牠 is “it” and their respective derivative forms). In each of these characters, the first (or upper) part defines the gender (man, woman, or thing/animal), while the second element gives the clue to its pronunciation.
In 1930, after a full century with dozens of Chinese translations, Bible translator Wang Yuande (王元德) coined a new “godly” pronoun: 祂. Chinese readers immediately knew how to pronounce it: tā. But they also recognized that the first part of that character, signifying something spiritual, clarified that each person of the Trinity has no gender aside from being God.
While the most important Protestant and Catholic Chinese versions respectively have opted not to use 祂, some Bible translations do and it is widely used in hymnals and other Christian materials. Among the translations that use 祂 to refer to “God” were early versions of Lü Zhenzhong’s (呂振中) version (New Testament: 1946, complete Bible: 1970). R.P. Kramers (in The Bible Translator 1956, p. 152ff.) explains why later versions of Lü’s translation did not continue with this practice: “This new way of writing ‘He,’ however, has created a minor problem of its own: must this polite form be used whenever Jesus is referred to? Lü follows the rule that, wherever Jesus is referred to as a human being, the normal ta (他) is written; where he is referred to as divine, especially after the ascension, the reverential ta (祂) is used.”
In that system one kind of pronoun is used for humans (male and female alike) and one for natural elements, non-liquid masses, and some spiritual entities (one other is used for large animals and another one for miscellaneous items). While in these languages the pronoun for spiritual entities used to be employed when referring to God, this has changed into the use of the human pronoun.
Lynell Zogbo (in The Bible Translator 1989, p. 401ff) explains in the following way: “From informal discussions with young Christians especially, it would appear that, at least for some people, the experience and/or concepts of Christianity are affecting the choice of pronoun for God. Some people explain that God is no longer ‘far away,’ but is somehow tangible and personal. For these speakers God has shifted over into the human category.”
In Kouya, God (the Father) and Jesus are referred to with the human pronoun ɔ, whereas the Holy Spirit is referred to with a non-human pronoun. (Northern Grebo and Western Krahn make a similar distinction.)
Eddie Arthur, a former Kouya Bible translation consultant, says the following: “We tried to insist that this shouldn’t happen, but the Kouya team members were insistent that the human pronoun for the Spirit would not work.”
In Burmese, the pronoun ko taw (ကိုယ်တော်) is used either as 2nd person (you) or 3rd person (he, him, his) reference. “This term clearly has its root in the religious language in Burmese. No ordinary persons are addressed or known by this pronoun because it is reserved for Buddhist monks, famous religious teachers, and in the case of Christianity, the Trinity.” (Source: Gam Seng Shae in The Bible Translator 2002, p. 202ff.)
In Thai, the pronoun phra`ong (พระองค์) is used, a gender-neutral pronoun which must refer to a previously introduced royal or divine being. Similarly, in Northern Khmer, which is spoken in Thailand, “an honorific divine pronoun” is used for the pronoun referring to the persons of the Trinity (source: David Thomas in The Bible Translator 1993, p. 445). In Urak Lawoi’, another language spoken in Thailand, the translation often uses tuhat (ตูฮัด) — “God” — ”as a divine pronoun where Thai has phra’ong even though it’s actually a noun.” (Source for Thai and Urak Lawoi’: Stephen Pattemore)
The English “Contemporary Torah” addresses the question of God and gendered pronouns by mostly avoiding pronouns in the first five books of the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament (unless God is referred to as “lord,” “father,” “king,” or “warrior”). It does that by either using passive constructs (“He gave us” vs. “we were given”), by using the adjective “divine” or by using “God” rather than a pronoun.
Some Protestant English Bibles use a referential capitalized spelling when referring to the persons of the Trinity with “He,” “His,” “Him,” or “Himself.” This includes for instance the New American Standard Bible, but most translations, especially those published in the 21st century, do not. Two other languages where this is also done (in most Bible translations) are the closely related Indonesian and Malay. In both languages this follows the language usage according to the Qur’an, which in turn predicts that usage (see Soesilo in The Bible Translator 1991, p. 442ff. and The Bible Translator 1997, p. 433ff. ).
See also this chapter in the World Atlas of Language Structures on different approaches to personal pronouns.
And he said to me: God addresses Ezekiel again, which Contemporary English Version makes clear by saying “God then said.”
For Son of man, see Ezek 8.5.
Do you see what they are doing…?: This is a rhetorical question. God is not asking Ezekiel if he sees what the people are doing, but is pointing out to him what they are doing. Therefore this question may be better translated as an exclamation that draws Ezekiel’s attention to the false worship and wicked deeds of the Israelites. One model that does this is “Look at what they are doing!”
The great abominations that the house of Israel are committing here: God describes their idolatry as great abominations (see 5.9), which may be rendered “terrible sins” (Contemporary English Version), “many hateful things” (New Century Version), or “shocking rites.” Perhaps the worst thing about these disgusting things was that the people were doing them here, that is, near God’s Temple.
To drive me far from my sanctuary renders the Hebrew clause here as the result of the idolatry. This is the way almost all modern translations understand this clause; for example, Good News Translation says “driving me farther and farther away from my holy place.” It was not the purpose or intention of the people to drive God away, but rather the result of their actions. A model that expresses this clearly is “These terrible things make me go farther and farther away from my holy place.” This interpretation fits well in these chapters that describe how God first leaves the Temple and then the city, but it puts a strain on the Hebrew, which is literally “to be [or, go] far away from my sanctuary.” The subject of the verb is not stated, so it is not clear who will be or go far away. It could be God (so King James Version, which has “that I should go far off from my sanctuary”), or it could be the people who are the subject of the previous clause. The latter understanding is more likely, and the meaning is that part of the wickedness of the people was that they went away from God’s holy place and set up the idol of Asherah outside the north gate where they were now worshiping. Following this interpretation, translators may render the whole rhetorical question as “Mortal man, look at the terrible things the people of Israel are doing here as they go farther and farther away from my holy place.”
But you will see still greater abominations may be rendered “You will see things even more terrible than this.” Thus far in the vision, Ezekiel had seen the statue of the false goddess and possibly some people worshiping it. God described these as great abominations, but what Ezekiel saw next was even worse.
Quoted with permission from Gross, Carl & Stine, Philip C. A Handbook on Ezekiel. (UBS Helps for Translators). Miami: UBS, 2016. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.